“What Has the Radical Left Ever Done for Us?”
- Shane Warren
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
There’s a scene in Monty Python’s Life of Brian (1979) that still makes me laugh out loud. John Cleese, playing the head of a resistance group in Judea, demands to know what the Romans have ever done for them. The crowd quickly answers back: sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, fresh water, public health. Each answer chips away at his outrage until, exasperated, he growls, “Alright, apart from all that, what have the Romans ever done for us?” Then someone mutters, “Brought peace?” - at which point he explodes and tells them to shut up.
It’s satire at its finest, poking fun at the contradictions of colonial apologia. But it also came to mind recently as I heard, yet again, the tired, sneering phrase: “the radical left.”
Apparently, the left is destroying society, undermining values, and eroding freedoms. And yet, here’s the inconvenient truth, much of what we call freedoms and values today were delivered precisely because the left fought tooth and nail for them.
So, apart from universal suffrage, workers’ rights, weekends, the end of child labour, civil rights, subsidised or in some country’s universal health cover, accessible education, women’s rights, environmental protections, minimum wages, safer workplaces, racial equality legislation, LGBTQIA+ recognition, and disability access… what has the “radical left” ever done for us?
History is Inconvenient for the Critics
The problem with rhetoric like “radical left” is that it frames progressive politics as fringe, reckless, and unhinged. But history tells another story. Most of the social, economic, and cultural gains that many conservatives today quietly enjoy were, in their time, dismissed as radical leftist lunacy.
Take the early labour movement. In the 19th century, unions campaigning for fair pay and safe working conditions were branded dangerous agitators, often met with violent suppression.1 Yet their fight secured the eight-hour workday and weekends, rights so normal now that most people scarcely realise they were once unthinkable.2
Or consider women’s suffrage. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, suffragettes were called hysterical, disruptive, and immoral. In Britain, many were arrested and brutalised; in the US and Australia, they faced mockery and entrenched resistance. Today, universal suffrage is considered a cornerstone of democracy.3
The same pattern runs through civil rights. Martin Luther King Jr., now canonised as a moral leader, was in his lifetime condemned as a dangerous radical by large segments of the American establishment. The FBI labelled him “the most dangerous Negro in America.”4 Yet the movement he led transformed racial equality laws across the Western world.
In the 1970s and 80s, campaigns for gay liberation were dismissed as perverse threats to social order. Those pushing for decriminalisation of homosexuality in Australia, the UK, and beyond were branded as extremists. Today, same-sex marriage is legal in much of the democratic world, and Pride marches are mainstream celebrations.5
So, the irony is rich. Those who sling “radical left” as an insult now live inside a society built on the victories of those very radicals. They drive on roads paid for by progressive taxation, take their weekends for granted, send their children to school without a thought, and expect emergency healthcare when it’s needed. Every one of those was once a “radical” idea, achieved because of successful petitioning done by the fight of the left.
Why the Term Works (and Why It’s Dangerous)
From a psychological perspective, the term “radical left” is clever political framing. It taps into the fear response framing change as a threat to identity, dignity, or stability. In resilience psychology, we see anger not as a primary emotion but as the mask that covers fear. When critics lash out at “the left,” what they are often expressing is fear: fear of change, fear of losing status, fear of losing control.6
By branding social progress as “radical,” critics shift the debate from the merits of the policy to the dangers of the ideology. It’s no longer about whether climate action, pay equity, or inclusive education are good ideas; it becomes about whether these ideas will destroy the very fabric of society. And fear is a powerful motivator.
But here’s the catch: history suggests that the fabric of society has not been destroyed by progressive reform, but rather it has been woven more tightly. When societies broaden freedom, expand dignity, and include more voices at the table they become more resilient, not less.
Kindness, Dignity, and the So-Called Radicals
Here’s what I find fascinating: the values of kindness, fairness, equity, and dignity which are the very values that underpin what critics call “radical left” weaknesses, are in fact profoundly constructive achievements not destructive ideals of a fragile few.
Take the eight-hour workday. It wasn’t born out of radical nihilism but from a simple recognition that workers are human beings deserving of rest and family time.7 Take civil rights legislation. It wasn’t about destabilising society but about giving all members of society equal dignity. Take universal healthcare. It was never about tearing down tradition but about ensuring people could live healthier, longer, more productive lives.
If kindness, dignity, and fairness are “radical,” then perhaps the insult says more about the accuser than the accused.
A Rambled Conclusion
So, the next time you hear someone slam “the radical left,” try the Monty Python test. Apart from suffrage, rights, wages, safety, healthcare, education, equality, and dignity… what has the radical left ever done for us?
The answer, of course, is quite a lot.
Here’s the thing: the debates of today, whether it be around climate action, Indigenous recognition, gender equity, refugee protections, and the like; will one day be looked back on as the obvious moral advances of our time. They will be baked into the freedoms our grandchildren enjoy without even realising they were once controversial.
So maybe, just maybe, we could retire the sneer of “radical left” and recognise it for what it often is: the birth cry of progress. Because history suggests that the so-called radicals are rarely the ones tearing society down. More often, they are the ones building the foundations we all stand on.
My Rambles with Shane Warren - never afraid to ask: what do we owe the radicals of the past, and what kind of world do we owe the generations to come?
Reference Footnotes
Hobsbawm, E. (1964). Labouring Men: Studies in the History of Labour. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ↩
ILO (2019). 100 years of the 8-hour workday. International Labour Organization. ↩
Grimshaw, P. (1989). Women’s Suffrage in Australia. Cambridge University Press. ↩
Garrow, D. (1981). The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Norton. ↩
Altman, D. (2012). Homosexual: Oppression and Liberation. University of Queensland Press. ↩
Reivich, K. & Shatté, A. (2002). The Resilience Factor. Broadway Books. ↩
Cooper, B. (1996). The Origins of the 8-Hour Day and the Politics of Labour. Labour History, 70, 1–25. ↩
Comments